Data analysis

Questionnaires have been one of the preferred tools in linguistics to gather information about language use and language attitudes in language maintenance (LM) and language shift (LS) projects and studies related to minority and indigenous languages (Pauwels, 2016). Joshua Fishman (1965) introduced the question ‘Who speaks what language to whom and when?’

as a guiding question in the design of the questionnaires exploring LM and LS issues. Over

the years this basic question has been extended to ‘Who speaks/uses what language/variety/code to whom, when, where and to what end/for which purpose?’

(Pauwels, 2016).

The questionnaires (see appendix) consist of twelve to seventeenth questions where respondents were asked to answer multiple choice questions. For each question, a comment box was designed for the participants to give extra information or clarification if desired.

The data is manually transcribed and then analyzed in the Excel program, using frequency and percentage tables as well as cross tabulations to compare the results and correlations among different pre-defined variables. The first questionnaire has multiple choice type questions, while the second questionnaire mixes questions with rated answers based on Likert scale (1932) and multiple- choice questions as well as open questions (i.e. How did this course help you use Sámi more?). No information about age or sex was gathered and therefore the analysis of the data does not consider these variables. One of the main reasons for age being omitted as a variable of interest was to avoid the dichotomy between ‘new speakers’ and ‘traditional speaker’ based on age variable. As Smith-Christmas and Murchandha in “Reflection on New Speakers Research and Future Trajectories” indicate

‘efforts to revitalize the language mean that younger speakers often have access to the language through education, whereas older speakers usually did not. Thus, on an abstract level, whether someone is a ‘new’ speaker, or a ‘traditional’ speaker is, in some cases, predicated on when a particular speaker was born’. (Smith-Christmas & Murchandha, 2018). Gender is also omitted as it does not represent a differential factor for the present study.

The questionnaire gives insights into reported behavior and not into the actual behavior and sometimes the gap between the two can be considerable (Pauwels, 2016). As a partial solution to closing the gap between reported and actual behavior is the implementation of a game that aims to create a map of co-production of knowledge together with the respondents

of the questionnaire and the student researcher ³⁴. The game aims to be a more detailed discussion about language importance and language use where learners can explore relevant language issues such as the factors and the situations that prevent Sámi language use and the possible solutions to them. The present project focuses on the process of North Sámi language learners to become Sámi new speakers. In the data analysis and discussion, the term – Sámi language – refers to the North Sámi. The process of becoming Sámi new speaker is analyzed in terms of reported use of Sámi language outside the classroom. For this, several axes of analysis were designed.

Firstly, I dealt with a description of the results from a classroom perspective: 1) students’

background and motivation; 2) students’ reported use of language and 3) the relevant factors that prevent and promote language use outside the classroom. Considering these main lines of analysis and division of the data, the research would describe the interactions of the different factors by cross-tabulating two or more independent variables. For example, are speakers more successful and dedicated to using the language, and therefore improving speaking outcomes, depending on their learning motivation? Second, is there a correlation between learners’ background – understood as previous knowledge and contact with Sámi language and culture- and the use of Sámi language and success in becoming a new Sámi language user? Are learners using more Sámi after the start of the course? What are the factors that promote and prevent this use? And the list continues.

Cross tabulations will be graphed through multiple contingency tables containing the independent variable (i.e. motivation, background etc.) and the dependent variable (use of language). The subcategories of independent variables do not present an equal number of samples. Therefore, the relationship between the subcategories and the reported use of

34 I personally prefer to use the term - student researcher - as I consider myself to be a student learning how to do research and more importantly, learning from my participants, my data and my supervisor.

language cannot be compared by numbers but by calculating percentages (the number of times a variant is used by the subcategory divided by the total numbers of samples of that group). The percentage will identify general tendencies within the subcategories (Meyerhoff et al., 2015: 126).

These axes of analysis are integrated within the main questions of the research: who are the students? How is the program? And finally, is it possible to become a Sámi new speaker through education programs such as the one proposed by UiT? The present work aims to draw tendencies on the path of new speakers learning process and therefore, contribute to a more general understanding of the possibilities and challenges to become a new speaker of Sámi through an education program. It also aims to give space to students’ voice by presenting the thoughts, ideas and background information the students shared in the comment boxes provided for each question in the surveys, their description of their experience in the program (See appendix second survey, Q18) as well as the game (see methodology chapter). It is in line with indigenous research methodology (Chilisa, 2012).

Table 1: Main axes of analysis within the research A- Classroom perspective (quantitative description)

1- Who are the participants: background and motivation?

2- Reported use of language

3- Factors that prevent and promote the use of language B- Cross- tabulation of variables

1- Background -use of language 2- Motivation- use of language 3- Factors -use of language

Language learning experience lies on a continuum and individuals are not categorized as successful or unsuccessful new speakers. At first, I considered to also integrate the exam results of the students into the data analysis. However, after much consideration, I tend to believe that the ‘success’ of becoming a new speaker is not straightly correlated to how much knowledge one has of the language but to how much one uses or try to use the language, and consequently improve their knowledge of it. In this case “using the language” stands for a variety of actions (reading, listening to the radio, speaking...etc.) that implies actively searching for contexts and situations that allows one to be in contact with the language.

Therefore, the present research does not aim to assess learner’s proficiency in Sámi language³⁵ but the experience of becoming a new speaker by examining the correlation between individual background, motivation, external factors, and language use. In this case, the process of becoming a new speaker is understood as a multifaced experience shaped by individual, group, and social factors.

35 Note that different questions related to grammatical or lexical knowledge of Sámi language were presented in the second survey as a factor that can prevent or promote the Sámi language use.